Spy case won’t derail U.S.-Cuba rapprochement, diplomat says
By David Brooks
La Jornada (Mexico) June 9, 2009
NEW YORK, June 8 — The case of the couple accused by the U.S. government of spying for Cuba will create bitterness and may temporarily halt the process of diplomatic rapprochement between Washington and Havana but won’t derail it, says Ambassador Wayne Smith, an expert on the bilateral relations between both countries.
Last Friday, the Justice Department announced the arrest of a high-ranking former official of the State Department and his wife, on charges of having spied for the Cuban government for 30 years. Walter Kendall Myers and Gwendolyn Myers were brought that day before a judge in Washington.
The news caused a great stir here. Opponents to President Barack Obama’s initiatives to move toward a broader diplomatic exchange with Havana said the case demonstrates that the Castro regime cannot be trusted.
And today Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered an investigation to evaluate how much damage was caused to U.S. intelligence by the couple’s alleged activities. The objective is to examine all security mechanisms to prevent any future activities of this type.
Brief effect
Smith, who, among other diplomatic assignments, was in charge of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana during Jimmy Carter’s presidency, told La Jornada that, unfortunately, this case will have a sort of breakup effect.
But, he added, this situation reflects only the existing situation. The Americans have their intelligence operations against them, and the Cubans against us, and it has been so for a long time. Therefore, this case will cause bitterness in the political context and “will make many people ask: ‘What’s happening here?’ even though it shouldn’t be that way.”
However, he added that he expects the affair to have a brief effect and will improve. Beyond that, Smith, who is a researcher for the Center For International Policy in Washington, said he is realistically optimistic about the future of the relationship.
I don’t think the Obama administration has an inborn hostility toward Cuba, as was the case with Bush. Therefore, his intention is different. But, at the same time, the issue of Cuba, in view of everything Cuba is facing, is not terribly important. There is a reluctance to proceed because they don’t want anything as unimportant for this administration to become an obstacle to other priorities, such as the financial debates in Congress, among other issues.
It is the voices of opposition to the rapprochement with the island — such as the Cuban-American legislators — that use this case to try to derail the process.
That opposition should not affect the White House’s decisions, Smith said, pointing out that “a majority of U.S. public opinion — even in the Cuban-American community — favors proceeding toward the normalization of relations with Cuba, as is the case of world public opinion.”
On the other hand, he said, the government has much to gain in its relationship with Latin America if it proceeds in that direction. We won’t be able to develop a really constructive relationship with Latin America if we don’t go ahead with Cuba. It’s simply a matter of moving in the right direction, and it’s hard to understand why [the Obama administration] has not done more.
Meanwhile, the media here have focused on the case of the alleged spies, seeking to detect the motives for which a former high-ranking specialist on Europe for the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and his wife, who never had any access to secret information, decided to risk their privileged lives to support the Cuban regime.
The FBI agent in charge of the case states in the court papers that “based on my review of past investigations of Cuban agents, recruitment by [the Cuban intelligence services] is frequently based on political convictions, ideology, or similar cultural interests.
“The investigation has revealed a diary, written by Kendall Myers, of his 1978 trip to Cuba. In his account of his trip, Kendall Myers expresses a strong affinity toward Cuba and its revolutionary goals, and a negative feeling toward ‘American imperialism.'”
He repressed deep anger: Washington Post
According to the FBI, Myers wrote in that diary during his 1978 trip that “Cuba is so exciting! I have become so bitter these past few months.” And when referring to the United States, he complains of “the abuses of our system, the lack of decent medical system, the oil companies and their undisguised indifference to public needs, the complacency about the poor.”
In contrast, “the revolution [in Cuba] has released enormous potential and liberated the Cuban spirit.”
Myers also writes that “everything one hears about Fidel [Castro] suggests that he is a brilliant and charismatic leader” and “one of the great political leaders of our time.”
To The Washington Post, the above reveals that Myers repressed a deep and longstanding anger against his country, an anger that allegedly predisposed him to spy for Cuba for three decades.
The Myerses pleaded not guilty in court and now face a long judicial process, at which their version of this story will sometime be heard.
David Brooks is U.S. bureau chief for La Jornada (Mexico).
Note: We invite the readers interested in this topic to read in the Reporter’s Notebook (in Spanish) (http://www.progresoblog.com/espanol/ ) the article titled The Case of the Alleged New Spies, published on June 8.
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2009/06/09/index.php?section=mundo&article=021n1mun
